Will Technology Turn Against You in 2009?

Seems as if it was only a couple of years ago that we were all worried about what was going to happen to our computers when 1999 turned into 2000. Now it's already just one year shy of a decade later, and that potential problem (which turned out to be mostly a non-issue) seems far in the past.

Or maybe not so far. Owners of the 30 GB model of Microsoft's Zune MP3 player received an unpleasant surprise last week when thousands of the devices suddenly locked up. The problem turned out to be a "leap year bug" whereby the internal clocks of the devices had not been programmed to handle a year with 366 days. The problem occurred if you connected the Zune to a computer on leap day; those who waited until after noon GMT on January 1 to do so weren't affected. Microsoft provided instructions for "unfreezing" the players, at
Zune.net | Zune 30 FAQ

At best the experience was an annoyance for people who lost the use of their players at just the wrong time (since many are traveling or off work during the holidays and perhaps more likely to be listening to music). Even worse, a few folks were reporting that the posted process for reviving the Zunes didn't work and they were left with "bricked" players (a term made popular by an early iPhone fiasco).

It's bad enough when our technological devices seem to turn against us because of some stupid programming error like the Y2K or Z366 flaws. It's even worse when technology that is supposedly developed for our benefit is deliberated used against us by criminals, corporations or the government. Unfortunately, we can probably expect to see more and more of the latter in 2009 and subsequent years.

Hackers are getting more sophisticated all the time and they always seem to stay a step ahead of the security measures designed to thwart them. Once upon a time, most network intruders were talented kids who broke into systems to prove their skills; they might inadvertently do damage, but that wasn't the primary intent. Today most attacks are launched with malice in mind, often for profit: there's an entire underground industry built on obtaining and using stolen information, from individual bank account passwords and credit card numbers to entire identities to corporate trade secrets and financials.

The bad guys also have more and better tools at their disposal than they did in the past. And thanks to technologies of convenience - such as wi-fi and Bluetooth and various applications that make computer users' lives easier but open up avenues of attack - they have more options for "getting in" and gaining access to our information. See the "XP Security News" section later in this newsletter for discussion about the Top Security Threats of 2009.

Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if it were only the bad guys that we had to worry about. After all, we expect them to do us harm. We don't - or at least shouldn't have to - expect the same from those with whom we do business or the governmental agencies that are supposed to protect us. Yet those entities are invading our privacy and putting our sensitive information at risk to an alarming degree, and the trend shows no sign of letting up.

I had an experience recently that brought that home in a personal way. I was shopping for groceries at Target and along with the usual items, I picked up a bottle of wine for a holiday party. When I got to the checkout counter, the clerk asked for my driver's license. I guess I look okay for my age, but on a Saturday morning, with my hair up in a makeshift ponytail that shows the gray at the temples and no makeup to speak of, nobody is going to mistake me for a 21 year old. Still, I don't mind verifying it for the record, so I held it out for the clerk to see.

That wasn't good enough. "I need to swipe it through the machine," he told me. Say what? Looking at my license to ensure that I'm not some sneaky prematurely aging 16 year old is one thing. Recording that information for who-knows-what later use is quite another. I noted that it was a privacy issue, and the clerk noted that he didn't like doing it but was required to. I ended up leaving the wine there. Later I went down the road to Tom Thumb, where I bought an identical bottle of wine for about a dollar more - but nobody asked me for my ID or wanted to swipe it through the system.

The more I think about it, the more troubled I am by this trend. I'm sure some readers will say "you got upset about giving them your driver's license but you probably paid with a credit or debit card." As a matter of fact, I was paying cash. But even if I weren't, recording the information from my driver's license is different from recording the limited information on my credit card. The magnetic strips and bar codes on drivers' licenses can contain all sorts of personal information, including your home address, your birth date, your social security number - everything that's needed to steal your identity or even to target you for a home burglary.

I don't know how or if Target plans to use the swiped ID information. I'm not too worried about being accused of having an alcohol problem based on my purchase of one bottle of wine three or four times a year. They'll say they're doing it to prove that they comply with state laws prohibiting sales of booze to minors, but the law doesn't require them to keep a database, just to reasonably ensure that a purchaser isn't under the age limit. It certainly would be tempting, though, to use that database for marketing purposes, since it's a way to get the info on customers who decline to participate in their (voluntary) reward card programs.

But regardless of Target's own use of the data, I'm more concerned about it getting into more malicious hands. When we read every day about breaches of data security, with private companies, universities and government agencies allowing people's personal data to be stolen or lost, I don't want mine in any more databases than absolutely necessary. If I can avoid that by buying my wine at a different store, that's what I'll do. That's no big loss to Target, I guess.

If only all privacy invasions were that easily circumvented. When it's the government doing the invading, we usually don't have a choice. There are so many examples of this that many of us have given up completely, but I still think it's important to take a stand against each new invasion of our privacy by our governments, whether federal, state or local.

You may have read that because drivers are doing what the government wanted them to do (driving less and driving more fuel efficient cars), gasoline tax revenues are down. Oh, dear. These taxes are used to build and maintain the roads (of course, if we're driving less, that should mean road maintenance costs decrease, too, but let's not confuse the issue with logic), so governments are "concerned." The governor of Oregon has proposed a "mileage" tax that will use a GPS to determine how many miles you drive your car and tax you 1.2 cents per mile:
Oregon governor looking at GPS-based mileage tax to fund roads - Engadget

I don't live in Oregon, and I probably drive far fewer miles than most people, but these "great ideas" have a way of starting on the west coast and spreading to the rest of the country. Having the government download the data routinely from everyone's GPS is another troubling idea to me. Of course, the governor assures his constituency that only the mileage data will be recorded - not where you go. And of course, he's a politician so we shouldn't be worried that it might not work out exactly as he says.

I love technology and I'm not ready to give it all up and go live in the woods with no electricity just because my technology has the potential to be used against me. But these trends bother me. How about you? Do you think the technology will be used to restrict, control and tax us more and more in the future? Or does the use of technology just ensure that laws are enforced and taxes imposed more fairly? Is it way too late to worry about privacy when our names are already in hundreds of databases? Or is it time to stand up and say "no" to unnecessary collection of our personal information? Tell us what you think.